The Debate Over the U.S. Department of Education: To Abolish or to Not Abolish

Sarmista Kolluru

Edited by Isabella Phillips

Published 12/17/2025

---

Image source: Education Next, “The Middle of the Beginning of Ending the Department of Education.”

If you’ve been keeping up with political debates lately, you’ve probably seen renewed ideologies from many Republicans, including President Donald Trump, to abolish the Department of Education. While the Department has not been shut down, proposals to do so have been circulating. The U.S. Department of Education (DOE), created in 1979, is a relatively new federal agency. Its job is to support schools, enforce federal educational laws, and expand access to education. However, in practice, the agency is at the center of heated debates over the affordability of higher education, student loans, civil rights, and the extent of the federal government's power over schools. Due to these tensions, one of the most debated questions today is whether the DOE should be reformed or abolished altogether.

Before deep-diving into arguments for and against the DOE, it is important to understand what the agency does. Despite common misconceptions, the Department of Education does not create school curriculum or run K-12 schools; this power belongs to the state and local districts. Instead, the DOE oversees student loans and Pell Grants, distributing billions of dollars in education funding. They also enforce civil laws in schools and colleges, and collect national education data. They are less of a controller and more of a coordinator, setting federal rules, ensuring that states follow federal laws, supporting vulnerable student groups, and managing the financial aid system that helps many achieve their dreams of getting college degrees. Whether their role is truly essential or excessive is where the debate begins.

Supporters argue that the DOE plays an important role in fairness, opportunity, and consistency. One of the most important strengths that the Department has is its enforcement of civil laws. Through its Office of Civil Rights, the DOE investigates cases of discrimination of race, sex, disability, and language status. Without the Office of Civil Rights, many families would not be able to fight these cases on their own. The DOE also provides crucial funding for students who need it, including Title I grants for high-poverty schools and Pell Grants that help millions of low-income students attend college. For students with disabilities, the DOE enforces IDEA, making sure that states provide services such as speech therapy, evaluations, and individualized education programs. Beyond just funding and enforcement, the department also collects national data that helps researchers, policymakers, and schools understand specific trends that are seen within students. To supporters, these functions help create equal opportunity and protect students in a way that states may not be able to do on their own.

Some critics argue that the DOE has become a costly and overly bureaucratic agency that does not always deliver results. Although it distributes billions in funding, the department itself does not teach or guide students. An estimate of 90% of education spending and classroom decisions are made by states and local districts. Opponents say that the DOE adds layers of regulations, paperwork, and compliance requirements that drain time and money from schools, especially smaller districts with limited staff. Others argue that national test scores have not improved and achievement gaps have not decreased, even with decades of federal involvement, raising concerns about whether the investment into the DOE is paying off. Many also believe that education should be a state issue, not a federal one, relating to constitutional concerns and arguing that local control leads to more output. These criticisms fuel the ongoing push to reduce, reform, or even eliminate the agency.

The debate over the Department of Education isn’t going away anytime soon, and for good reason, as it sits at the intersection of funding, civil rights, state authority, and the future of American schools. The DOE clearly plays a significant role in distributing funding, enforcing federal laws, and running the student loan system. However, it also comes with a huge price tag, regulatory burdens, and decades of mixed results. Supporters use national standards and protections provided by the DOE as a defense, while critics argue that states could handle most responsibilities without a federal middleman. As long as questions about cost, effectiveness, and federal authority remain, the debate over the DOE’s future will continue. Understanding both the advantages and the drawbacks is crucial in formulating society's stance on the department, and what actions should be taken in regards to it.